Research Interview Notes of Richard F. Fenno, Jr. with
Members of the U.S. House of Representatives, 1959-1965

Access to this interview is subject to the deed of
gift of December 14, 1993.

Interview with Rep. Louis C. Rabaut (D-MI)
June 3, 1959
General remarks: Very expansive, a real politician, but not, I think, as powerful as he might
believe.

Why go on Appropriations? "It deals with the money matters of the government."

An Appropriations Committee assignment is "a prize plum. People argue about which is the
most powerful committee, Ways and Means or Appropriations. I could have had either one, but I
wanted Appropriations. I've only known one man who went from Appropriations to Ways and
Means, and he went because the Speaker asked him to go to even things up."

Regarding Appropriations: "It's been called the third body of the Congress"--other members are
resentful.

How on the committee? "I went on through the Speaker, Joe Byrns [D-TN, 1935-1936], . . .
there was a unanimous vote when I went on . . . there was one vacancy on the list, and everybody
thought that the Congress might change and the bottom men would get thrown off in the next
election. I said, 'I'll take the chance,' and that's how I got on Appropriations"--after he was
defeated and came back, he got right back on the committee.

The majority of people are fair . . . and if you treat a person the way you want to be treated then it
counts like hell--especially in Congress. Oh, you should be nice to anyone, but if you just meet a
person once he may not remember it. Around here it grows and grows like a mountain . . . I don't
have any enemies. Oh, maybe one. A fellow got mad at me last year, but he was wrong." How
do you cut? "Oh, you just feel it after a while (He felt the air with his fingers), and you've got
lots of precedents to go by. We say, well, we did this in such and such a case, so why the hell
shouldn't we do it now."

He wouldn't go back on the State Subcommittee because they didn't look after him when he was
defeated--"I was their friend, and when I was defeated they gave me the cold shoulder . . . when I
came back they came down to the station with a limousine. I said I'll ride in your car, but I'll
never sit on your subcommittee again."

He went on Public Works. Appropriations Chairman Clarence Cannon (D-MO), put him
on.

Regarding Cannon and John Taber (R-NY), the ranking minority member: "Sometimes they
work closely together, and other times they're at loggerheads with each other." In the conference
committee Cannon and Taber come to every conference--"I don't think that's right. If they agree
they can carry the conference on our side." If they agree they can tip the balance either 4-3 or
5-2.

Regarding conferences: I've seen so many conferees that they had to move to a larger room
because everybody wanted to know what was going on--"I'm not saying this as a House lover but
all the work's done in the House."

Regarding the Senate: "Why, we're the guinea pigs of the country. We have to go back to the
country every two years and face the people. The senators can stay down here and do what they
want for four years, and then get awful nice the last two years and rely on the short memory of
the people."

Advice to newcomer: "Learn the business of your committee."

He relies heavily on his clerk: "If you know each other well, he knows what you did last year
and what you're interested in and what you will hop on."

Only once did he get information from inside an agency. He says he discovered the first
Communist in government, but he went about it quietly.

Secretary of State Cordell Hull (1933-1944) nicknames him "our friend"--"Why, I reorganized
the State Department in financial matters"--Sol Bloom (D-NY, 1923-1949) wanted to do it but
couldn't. He asked him to come to his committee. He said it wasn't cricket, but he did take a
back room--"up in the back room, I reorganized the State Department in twenty minutes."

He spoke feelingly about how he would have been in line for the chairmanship of
Appropriations--the press in Michigan never mentioned this. When he was defeated the press
spoke of the great potentialities of his successor--who didn't know his way around at all--"who
were they hurting?--themselves. Don't you think I couldn't get anything I wanted for Michigan
as chairman of Appropriations--chairman of the Appropriations Committee (he repeated this)?
Why certainly."

His constituents don't know about his job because of the press.

The strength of the House in conference depends on the chairman of the subcommittee--who he
is and how hard he fights.

Regarding the omnibus appropriation bill: He was the chairman of it--he attended every
conference--at the end of the bill, in thirteen words, it showed the size of the cut--"I wanted to cut
it a billion but I settled for five hundred and eighty-five million dollars." He said it was given up
because it showed in one line the great difference between Senate and House cuts.